BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

32 results for “capital gains”+ Section 80p(2)(d)clear

Sorted by relevance

Bangalore176Mumbai102Panaji70Raipur50Delhi47Pune32Cochin29Hyderabad28Chennai27Visakhapatnam24Kolkata24Ahmedabad21Jaipur19Lucknow18Chandigarh12Surat12Indore9Nagpur8Telangana5Rajkot4Cuttack4Karnataka3Varanasi3Kerala3Amritsar3SC3

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)(a)77Section 80P59Section 80P(2)(d)38Deduction28Section 143(3)22Addition to Income21Section 26320Section 5614Disallowance10Section 250

AHMEDNAGAR ZILLA GRAMSEVAKANCHI SAHAKAR PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,AHILYANAGAR vs. PCIT, PUNE-1, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1301/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Nov 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

d) from the total income\nc) Deduction U/S 80P(2)(c) Rs 50,000/-\nAs Per Sec 80P(2)(c) in the case of a co-operative society engaged in activities other than those\nspecified in clause (a) or clause (b) (either independently of, or in addition to, all or any of the\nactivities so specified), so much

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

6
Business Income6
Section 80P(2)5

MAHATMA GANDHI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MYDT UDGIR,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 1 -LATUR, LATUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 671/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: \nDepartment by
Section 142(1)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d) of\nthe Act?\"\nThat while holding the aforesaid issues in favour of the revenue\ndepartment, the Court followed the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt in the case of same assessee which was later on followed by\nthis Court in the case of State Bank of India Vs. CIT, reported in\nMANU/GJ/1053/2016

R&DE (ENGRS) EMPLOYEES CO-OP. CREDIT SOCIETY,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 7(3), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 762/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri A.V. IyerFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

capital, if not immediately required to be lent to the members, they cannot keep the said amount idle. If they deposit this amount in bank so as to earn interest, the said interest income is attributable to the profits and gains of the business of providing credit facilities to its members only. The society is not carrying on any separate

INCOME-TAX OFFICER vs. KESHAVSMURTI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LTD.,, RAIGAD

ITA 936/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.936/Pun/2015 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Income Tax Officer, अऩीऱाथी/Appellant Ward 5, Panvel …. Vs. Keshavsmurti Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., Shop No.1G/F, Anpurna Niwas, Shivaji Road, Tal – Panvel, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Dist – Raigad – 410206 Pan: Aaaak7390L प्रत्याक्षेप सं./Co No.30/Pun/2017 यििाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 (Out Of Ita No.936/Pun/2015) Keshavsmurti Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., Shop No.1G/F, Anpurna Niwas, Shivaji Road, Tal – Panvel, … प्रत्याक्षेऩक/ Cross Objector Dist – Raigad – 410206 Pan: Aaaak7390L Vs. The Income Tax Officer, …. प्रत्यथी / Respondent Ward 5, Panvel

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Pathak
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

gains which was not immediately required by the assessee for lending money to the members as there were no takers and hence, was deposited in the banks so as to earn interest, such interest income earned by the assessee was held to be attributable to carrying on the business and therefore, same was liable to be deducted in terms

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD – 3, SATARA vs. M/S. SHRI BHAIRAVNATH MULTISTATE COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, SATARA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2996/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jha
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2Section 44ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(ai)Section 80P(2)(d)

section 80P (2) (d).The observation of the Tribunal is reproduced as under- “We have heard the rival submissions and perused the records. The scope of s. 8oP(2)(d) of the Act is to allow a deduction in the computation of total income of a Co-operative Society in respect of incomes earned by the society as enumerated

THE SANGLI SALARY EARNERS CO OP SOCIETY LTD,SANGLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3 SANGLI, SANGLI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2254/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2254/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2020-21 The Sangli Salary Earners Co V The Income Tax Officer, Op Society Ltd., S. Ward-3, Sangli. 1104 B, Harbhat Road, Main City, Sangli – 416416 Pan: Aaaat0980D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Amit Sudhir Shintre(Virtual) Revenue By Smt. Saumya Pandey Jain-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 17/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2020-21, Dated 27.08.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.143(3) Read With Section 143(3) R.W.S 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.09.2022. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Deduction U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) Relying On The Decision Of Totgars Co-

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

gains of business" attributable to the activity of banking/credit facilities and deductible u/s 80P(2)(a)(i). Considering the same entire addition of Interest income of Rs.3,71,88,591/- should be allowed as a deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act 2. Deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) and Inapplicability of Section 80P(4) Without prejudice

VAIBHAV NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT, NEAR SAWANT NIWAS, OPP. PANCHVATI THEATER,ICHALKARANJI,ICHALKARANJI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD NO. 1, VRINDAVAN COLONY, ASARA NAGAR, SANGLI ROAD, ICHALKARANJI, ICHALKARANJI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1210/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1210/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21 Vaibhav Nagari Sah Pat V The Assessing Officer, Sanstha Maryadit, S Ward No.1, Ichalkaranji. 10/1280, Sawant Niwas, Opp.Panchvati Theter, Sangli Road, Ichalkaranji – 416115. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaaav0226E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Dayanand Jawalikar – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/06/2025

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

capital and operational funds in the normal course of business as a measure of commercial prudence, and the interest income thereon is directly attributable to the business activity of providing credit facilities to members. The lower authorities also ignored the principle of mutuality, which governs cooperative societies, and incorrectly assessed the income under the head "Income from Other Sources" instead

MAHATMA GANDHI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MYDT UDGIR,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 1 -LATUR, LATUR

ITA 670/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Miss Sailee Gujarathi (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

80P(2)(d) of the Act?" That while holding the aforesaid issues in favour of the revenue department, the Court followed the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of same assessee which was later on followed by this Court in the case of State Bank of India Vs. ClT, reported in MANU/GJ/1053/2016

DR JAGADALE MAMA HOSPITAL EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,SOLAPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - 4, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 208/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Dr Jagadale Mama Hospital Vs. Pr.Cit-4, Pune Employees Coop Credit Society Ltd., Dhanaji Arjun Pawar Dr Jagadale Mama Hospital Employees Society, Shivaji Nagar Barshi Taluka Barshi, Solapur - 413401 Pan : Aaaad3228Q Appellant Respondent

Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

2)(d). Hence, allowing of the deduction by the Assessing Officer under section 80P for the above amount is not as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Para 10 of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op Society

UMASA CHAVAN NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA,SOLAPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX: 4, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 232/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Umasa Chavan Nagari Sahakari Vs. Pr.Cit-4, Pune Patsanstha 267 46 Raviwar Peth, Solapur – 413005 Pan : Aaabu0049D Appellant Respondent

Section 263Section 80OSection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

2)(d). Hence, allowing of the deduction by the Assessing Officer under section 80P for the above amount is not as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Para 10 of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op Society

SHRI SHARAD GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHAKARI PATASANSTHA LTD.,,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -4,, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 313/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G.D. Padmahshaliनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shri Sharad Gramin Bigar Sheti Vs. Pr.Cit-4, Pune Sahakari Pathasanstha Ltd., Sharad Sankul, Malegaon (Bk), Tal. Baramati, Dist. Pune – 413102 Pan : Aabas6680G Appellant Respondent

Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

2)(d). Hence, allowing of the deduction by the Assessing Officer under section 80P for the above amount is not as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Para 10 of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op Society

YASHWANT NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 10(1) PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 644/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

d). 8. In this respect we are enclosing latest favourable judgements delivered by the Hon. Pune ITAT bench on the issue of deduction of bank interest u/s 80P. 9. [2024] 158 taxmann.com 322 (Pune - Trib.) IN THE ITAT PUNE BENCH ’SMC’ in Kolhapur District Central Co-Op. Bank Kanista SevakanchiSahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd. v. Income-tax Officer, IT APPEAL

SWAMI VIVEKANAND STATE CO.OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,,SOLAPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX: 4, PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 230/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Swami Vivekanand Multi State Vs. Pr.Cit-4, Pune Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd. 658/659, Near Janta Bank, Main Road, Akkalkot, Dist. Solapur - 413216 Pan : Aaias3245A Appellant Respondent

Section 263Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 8o

2)(d). The Assessing Officer has not caused any verification of this issue. 8. The submissions made by the assessee Society are examined in detail. a. The Assessment record has been verified in detail and the submissions stated to have seen made regarding the Deposits made with different banks are seen to have been given without details as to when

SHREE TULJABHAVANI NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -5 , PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 254/PUN/2020[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.254/Pun/2020 िनधा"रणवष" /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Tuljabhavani Nagari The Principal Commissioner Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Vs Of Income Tax - 5, Pune. 17/04, 103, Shri Tuljibhavani Plaza Mangalnagar, Wakad Road, Thergaon, Pune. Pan: Aadas 9902 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 16/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 28/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr.Dipak P.Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Pr.Commissioner Of Income-Tax-5, Pune’S, Order Dated 08.01.2019For The Assessment Year 2014-15, Involving Proceedings Under Section 263(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. Pr.Commissioner Of Income Tax Has Erred In Passing The Order Which Is Without Jurisdiction & Bad In Law. Same May Please Be Cancelled. 2. Pr.Cit Has Erred In Alleging That Order U/S 143(3) Passed By Assessing Officer Is Erroneous In So Far As It Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. Appellant Prays To Cancel The Same.

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

d) of Section 80P(2) of the Act would not apply in the facts and circumstances of the present case. The person or body corporate from which such interest income is received will not change its character, viz. interest income not arising from its business operations, which made it ineligible. I find that the issues are squarely covered

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(3),, PUNE vs. MAHARASHTRA BANK EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,, PUNE

ITA 1763/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri M.R. BhagwatFor Respondent: Mrs. Shabana Parveen
Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

gains which was not immediately required by the assessee for lending money to the members as there were no takers and hence, was deposited in the banks so as to earn interest, such interest income earned by the assessee was held to be attributable to carrying on the business and therefore, same was liable to be deducted in terms

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), NASHIK, NASHIK vs. MICO EMPLOYEES CREDIT COOP SOCIETY LTD., NASHIK

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 281/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 56Section 80(2)(d)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

capital among its members in the course of their banking business. All the income from banking business which is referable to s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act should qualify for deduction under the Act. DISTINGUISHING FACTOR BETWEEN TOTGARS COOPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD. VS. ITO 322 ITR 283 AND MICO EMPLOYEE CREDIT CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY 1. Scope of Activities

LEKHAKOSH KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI SANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. PR. CIT, PUNE-4, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 575/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 263

2)(d). Hence, allowing of the deduction by the Assessing Officer under section 80P for the above amount is not as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In Para 10 of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court decision in the case of Tumkur Merchants Souharda Credit Co-op Society

ARMED FORCES EX-OFFICERS MULTISERVICES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS NFAC, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 787/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: CA Shweta JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

capital gains amounting to INR 20,17,659/- twice while computing the income as per the assessment order under section 147 rws 144 rws 1448 dated 26 March 2022. Also, Tax credits such as TDS Advance and self- assessment tax paid for the has not been given while computing final tax liability. 3) The appellant craves leave to add, alter

SINDHUDURGA ZILLA MADHYAMIK ADHYAPAK VA UCCHYA MADHYAMIK SHIKSHAK VA SHIKSHAKETAR KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT,,SINDHUDURG vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 154/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Achal Sharma
Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

d)/80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act in respect of interest income earned on deposits with Co-operative scheduled Bank and dividend income from investment in shares of Co-operative Bank. The Revenue has placed heavy reliance on the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Totgars, Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. Vs. Income

SHARADCHANDRA NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 10(1), PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1068/PUN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1068/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sharadchandra Nagari Sahakari V The Income Tax Officer, Patsanstha Maryadit, S Ward-10(1), Pune. At Post–Rajuri, Taluka–Junnar, Dist. Pune – 412411. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaabs1016L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Abhay Avachat – Ar Revenue By Shri Dayanand Jawalikar – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 12/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 18/06/2025

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56Section 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

d).” 2.1 Therefore, AO held that Assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s.80P of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, assessee filed appeal before the ld.CIT(A). Para 6.8 of the ld.CIT(A)’s order is as under : “6.8 Hence, the income by way of interest earned by deposit or investment does not change its character irrespective